[TangledUpInBlue]

Well, this is encouraging.

[Sarah Barracuda]

JUST IN: Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson changed her tune, and said she now worries about future President’s being prosecuted. She asked the prosecutor if people at the Justice Department are concerned with this as well.

“Absolutely,” he responded. “That is a structural argument built into the constitution itself.” She then went on to say future President’s shouldn’t be burdened by the fear of prosecution for their actions.

[gov_bean_ counter]

No **** Sherlock…

[Parley Baer]

“Well, this is encouraging.”

Coming from Roberts, I agree. Sounds like he understands the lawfare against President Trump that the Democrats are waging.

[TonyinLA]

They’re just trying to figure out a formula where they can still convict PDJT but sheild obama, characterizing Trump’s objecting to the 2020 steal was for “personal” benefit and obama’s murder of an american “official”.

Watch.

[RckyRaCoCo]

Sad to think we’ve stooped so low as to the Supreme Court having to weigh in on what any 10 year old can see is obvious political persecution.

[Right Brother]

Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts

Almost stopped reading right there.

[butlerweave]

Take away Trump’s immunity and everyone’s goings

[Bookshelf]

..And reliance on the good faith of the prosecutor may not be enough in some cases. Should read:
Is never enough in most cases.

[Sidebar Moderator]

Meltdown tonight on MSNBC. Can’t wait.

[Political Junkie Too]

Dreeben said that the first layer of structural protection is the expectation that the President will faithfully execute the laws of the land.

I nearly fell out of my seat when I heard that. I wanted a Justice to ask him if that meant that a President who ignored immigration laws and let 10 million foreigners illegally enter the United States can be prosecuted after he leaves office?

-PJ

[wildcard_redneck]

If Trump becomes president the first thing must do is fire every DOJ attorney that he can and bring in his own team.

[1Old Pro]

Roberts signaled concern about relying merely on the "good faith" of the prosecutors to prevent abusive prosecutions against presidents

Yep, they will abuse it alright. The lawyer said oh no, it's hardly been used, just on Nixon and Trump (two Republicans)

[pierrem15]

Every official according to precedent has some "qualified immunity" for official acts from dog catcher on up, unless it's official wrongdoing like bribery or abuse of authority.

So why not the President?

[pierrem15]

Every official according to precedent has some "qualified immunity" for official acts from dog catcher on up, unless it's official wrongdoing like bribery or abuse of authority.

So why not the President?